View Full Version : HighPoint RocketRAID 2340 Controller - Supporting 12,000GB of storage

Comment Bot
01-18-2007, 10:19 AM
Please feel free to comment about our story entitled "HighPoint RocketRAID 2340 Controller - Supporting 12,000GB of storage (www.tweaktown.com/reviews/1037)"

01-18-2007, 04:51 PM
Weee!!!!!! When the 1.1 terrabyte drives come out its going to be interesting to see how it performs under this card.

01-18-2007, 04:52 PM
Weee!!!!!! When the 1.1 terrabyte drives come out its going to be interesting to see how it performs under this card.

I couldn't say for sure but the RocketRAID 2340 should be able to support it. HPT can just release new drivers and / or BIOS updates for it. :ar15firin

01-18-2007, 10:50 PM
OK, a "review" of a 16 port card, and all I get is 2-drive RAID 0 and single drive numbers?? :sleepy: If I'm buying a 16 port card, I want to know 3 or 4 drive RAID 5 performance at a minimum. Where's the RAID 10 numbers? Is online array expansion supported? If so, how about a test? I can buy a 2-drive RAID 0 card that would perform just as well as this card for under $50. At best this article should be called a preview, and has no business giving any kind of rating based on the very limited testing done.

This seems like nothing but a fluff piece so Highpoint can put a 9.0 of 10 Tweaktown rating graphic on the box. :angryfire

01-18-2007, 11:14 PM
While this review is interesting, it's seriously flawed because you didn't test the controller (and system!) with more drives installed. How many people are going to put just two drives on this controller?

It would have been better to see how four or eight or even sixteen drives did on here, in various RAID configurations, and whether or not you could saturate the system's throughput.

Just two drives in RAID0 is useless. How about RAID1 at least?

Evil Overlord
01-20-2007, 05:22 AM
I completely agree with l8gravely.

In the opening page of the review this card is described as being "...designed more for small to medium-sized businesses with quite serious storage requirements." Yet the computer hardware, software, and testing methodolgies reflect a home user enthusiast type usage. The reviewer should have used Windows 2000 Server or Windows 2003 OS rather than Windows XP. He also should have given a brief overview of the System Administration software provided with the controller.

A RAID controller such as this should be tested with more than two drives in RAID 1, 10, & 5. Furthermore, the reviewer should use IOMeter (or a similar product) to place different types of loads on the arrays: File Server and Web Server. For more information on load types, check out www.storagereview.com (http://www.storagereview.com). On this page http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200111/20011109Renaissance_8.html they discuss the configuration of IOMeter for File & Web server traffic patterns. That page is a little out of date (just over 6 years) and has since been replaced by this one http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200510/Testbed4_6.html. The down side of the newer page is that Storage Review doesn't specifically define the usage patterns. Regardless, the goal of any technical review of a product should be to beat the bloody hell out of it, display the results, and describe in detail the tests used so they can be reproduced by a 3rd party.

I called Highpoint Technologies and found out the following information. RAID functionality is handled purely by hardware. I had expected HighPoint to use an Intel chip, but instead it is a chip developed by HighPoint called the '601'. This is the same chip that fuels the 2320 controller. The tech I spoke to said the 601 is also the brains behind the 220 PCI-X RAID controller. I checked out the Highpoint web site looking for a model 220 controller but couldn't find any. I'm sure that I miss heard the tech and he probably said '2220'; which is a PCI-X SATAII RAID controller. The tech couldn't tell me the MHZ of said processor.

01-20-2007, 08:46 AM
Don't most Motherboards qualify in not needing a card like this? I'm a little confused...

01-21-2007, 09:47 PM
Don't most Motherboards qualify in not needing a card like this? I'm a little confused...

Yes and no - depends what you want to do.

02-12-2007, 03:49 PM
It does feel like an incomplete review.

Why buy such a controller if you are not going to use just the advanteges of the controller; the amount of channels for example.

It would be nice to revisit the review with a test using no less than four drives. And even then it would be nice to test it with even more drives.

I am using an Intel SRCS16 RAID controller with four 500GB WD drives in RAID 5 and I have been considering the HighPoint controller since I eventually want to use more drives (6+?).

The HighPoint product itself is marketed at servers and NOT workstations - so why not test it in a server enviroment?

Could someone please test this produkt in an enviroment in which it is intended?

03-07-2007, 12:45 PM
Congratulations on another appaling review of a RAID controller. Really, what is the target market for these things? Please stop reviewing server class cards if you're not even going to test anything better than RAID-0, it's an insult to your readers' intelligence and to all the good men who died securing our freedom.

04-28-2007, 11:31 PM
*wrong topic? *

04-28-2007, 11:32 PM
I agree with the majority of these comments. This review was poor. I'm looking for a raid (http://forums.tweaktown.com/#) card to use with 15 drives in a single array and this review was no help at all. Anyone seen a decent review?